SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1956 Supreme(MP) 31

DIXIT
FIRM DEOCHAND PANNALAL – Appellant
Versus
SHUBHKARAN SHIVDEOJI – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
A.P.Tayal, N.H.Dravid

DIXIT, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition to revise an order of the second Additional District Judge, indore, rejecting the objection of the applicants that ant application for execution of a decree against them filed by the non-applicant Shubhkaran on 15th March, 1951, was not maintainable inasmuch as the decree had been attached by Messrs. Khemji Punja and Co. , Bombay, in execution of their own. decree against shubhkaran. The precise objection raised by the applicants in the lower Court, and negatived there was that the non-applicant had not obtained the leave of the court making the attachment.

( 2 ) BEFORE me Mr. Tayal learned counsel for the applicants, urged that under the order of attachment of the decree in question issued on 6th October, 1951 by the additional District Judge, Indore to the Court of the District Judge, Indore, the execution of the decree was stayed until the court of the Additional District Judge, indore which passed the decree in favour of Messrs. Khemji Punja and Co. , cancelled the notice requesting the stay of execution or until the holder of the decree sought to be executed, namely Messrs. Khemji Punja and Co. , applied to the Court to execute the decree; an






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top